Contents

It introduced a requirement for British cinemas to show a quota of British films, for a duration of 10 years. The Act's supporters believed that this would promote the emergence of a vertically integrated film industry, in which production, distribution and exhibition infrastructure are controlled by the same companies. The vertically integrated American film industry saw rapid growth in the years immediately following the end of the First World War. The idea, therefore, was to try and counter Hollywood's perceived economic and cultural dominance by promoting similar business practices among British studios, distributors and cinema chains. By creating an artificial market for British films, it was hoped that the increased economic activity in the production sector would eventually lead to the growth of a self-sustaining industry. The quota was initially set at 7.5% for exhibitors, which was raised to 20% in 1935.

With regards to what was and what was not considered a British film, the Act approved by Parliament specified:

The film must be made by a British or British controlled company

Studio scenes must be photographed within a film studio in the British Empire/Commonwealth

The author of the scenario or the original work the screenplay was based on must be a British Subject

At least 75% of the salaries must be paid to British Subjects [2] excluding the costs of two persons at least one of which must be an actor. (This caveat refers to the fact that a British film could engage a highly paid international star, producer, or director whilst still being regarded as a British film.)[3]

The Act is generally not considered a success. On the one hand, it was held responsible for a wave of speculative investment in lavishly budgeted features which could never hope to recoup their production costs on the domestic market (e.g. the output of Alexander Korda's London Films, a boom-and-bust which was famously satirised in Jeffrey Dell's 1939 novel Nobody Ordered Wolves). At the other end of the spectrum, it was blamed for the emergence of the quota quickie.

The quota quickies were low-cost, poorer-quality, quickly accomplished films commissioned by American distributors active in the UK purely to satisfy the quota requirements. In recent years, revisionist film historians such as Lawrence Napper have argued that the quota quickie has been too casually dismissed, and is of particular cultural and historical value because it recorded performances unique to British popular culture (e.g. music hall and variety acts), which under normal economic circumstances would not have been filmed.